Coaches & Officials Meeting

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Well, in the case of the D3 supervisor, his asked the 12 HCs would they rather have an official who is a great communicator or an official who is a great play caller. By 11-1 the communicator won out.

We can poo-poo this all we want, but at the college level coaches do have influence with supervisors. If a veteran college supervisor (who is also used as a video observer for major conferences) feels it is important, I'm not going to act like I know better.

At the college level, I totally agree with you. At the high school level (at least in my area) I would disagree a little. High school coaches are a different animal. They tend to be less professional and often have less perspective on how to deal with officials. They tend to take things very personal or think that we have issues with them personally, instead of us just doing our job. College coaches have their jobs in the balance. They lose they lose their livelihood on many levels (or it has not changed totally). Not so much the case with high school coaches that if they lose their coaching position, they are still likely teachers. And in many cases here, you will not be hired as just a coach. You will have to work for the school district in order to coach.

Originally Posted by Raymond

And, as some of you like to do, it doesn't mean a great communicator can be a crappy play-caller. What it means is that a great play-caller is going to suffer if he is a crappy communicator. And a 100% of the time when I hear discussions about veteran big-time officials whom I think are not that good, I find out that official has a great reputation for communicating and running a game.

And even the big time officials just like everyone else has a coach or two that does not like them in a big way. You do have to be a good communicator, but you also have coaches that are held to a higher standard at the college level.

Peace